CSS3 is it right time to start?

css, css2 and now css3. Tech is making developers like us mad but yes for productive too. But problem designers face is that, we have to make sure each and every single attempt we take must insure best usability to viewers especially in case of browsers.

CSS3 is not registered with IE yet, even some elements don’t work properly with chrome or even in Firefox. If this is the case is CSS3 is the right time for designers to chose?

I am using CSS3 in my blog designed in Wordpress in concern that most of my visitors are using Firefox. I also made an additional IE.css file for IE visitors. But that made me double work.

If that is the case what is your opinion?

Well you can opt to use CSS3 but as you have noticed you have to be aware that many browsers haven’t implimented CSS3 modules yet, so for those who don’t have it make sure that a degraded version of the page is available to them.

I personally think there are only a handful (at most) of CSS3 componenets that can even be used in a page widely supported :slight_smile:

Large parts of CSS3 are still in draft format. Some browsers are implementing parts of it so that experimenters can try it out and see if the current draft will actually work. If the draft for a particular part works in sufficient tests then it can become a standard and then all the browsers can implement it. If it doesn’t work as hoped then they can redo the draft and try again.

If you design with graceful degradation in mind then you can use what you want. Just make sure that if the property you are using isn’t supported then the page doesn’t break and is still usable.

For example using round corners for good browsers just means that older browers get square corners but the content is still accessible and the page is not broken.

Just choose carefully and allow for the page to degrade nicely.

Progressive enhancements are the way to go.
If we as developers cater to less advanced browsers, then we aren’t taking advantage of the newer, improved browsers.

You are right, even I am facing the problem. If you see @fontface is vastly for safary, mozila or even chrome dont have support… but we need time to have css3 in its full exposer…

I do agree with you … but one thing to loot after is that … “I have seen my IE users are still using IE 6!!! I was bit surprised because my blog is for website developers… so expected visitors should use better browser as expected… why IE 6? is that because they want to see other site performing in IE6???”

Thanks Paul … applying this technique already

but do you think these browsers are supporting w3c standard at every cases? If they are following that then every browser should be update according w3c standard updates.

Until the CSS 3 standard is actually completed browsers can’t implement all of it because they don’t know what it will and will not contain as a standard prior to it becoming a standard.

As for people using IE6, maybe they are accessing your site from work (during their lunch break) and their work intranet is still dependent on IE6 to work and so can’t be upgraded.

One of the problems with CSS3 is that many browsers use proprietary implementations (such as with opacity), this means that you might require several different implementations for each browser (for a temporary fix) and over time, these will be phased out by the official versions as they are standardised. Using CSS3 in this manner probably means you might have a few validation issues and you will need to keep your stylesheet up-to-date as support gains :slight_smile:

Until the CSS 3 standard is actually completed browsers can’t implement all of it because they don’t know what it will and will not contain as a standard prior to it becoming a standard.

Using CSS3 in this manner probably means you might have a few validation issues and you will need to keep your stylesheet up-to-date as support gains

These are good points, the nature of the standards will mean that current implementations of css3 on the web may not work in the near future releases of browsers. That being said, if you have control over a site and don’t mind upgrading it as the final recommendations are implemented then go for your life using these new tools - Just don’t make the site require them to work.

The most important point of all.

We never should force users this kind of things while some major browsers are still not supporting it. Websites are for users, users not for websites.

The W3C - unlike the ISO, for example - isn’t at liberty to define standards, hence why the last maturity level in the W3Cs publication track is Recommendation. In actual fact, the level of adoption amongst vendors could be attributed to determining whether a specification becomes a “standard” (in the loose sense of the word), or not.

It’s at the vendors discretion as to when they want (if they want to at all) to implement a specification; their decision could be based on factors such as cost.

Upon implementation, in essentially all cases, a property value is stable enough (one exception being ‘[i]border-radius[/i]’) to be consistent across browsers. One exception to this rule is IE, where their proprietary property only aims to emulate an effect of opacity; there is no logical correlation between this proprietary property and the CSS3 spec defining opacity as standalone property, I don’t believe.

To signify a partial or experimental implementation, vendors may require authors to prepend a property with their vendor-specific prefix. In this case, it should just be a case of duplicating the property/value pairs, whilst also including a non-prefixed version of the property.

Backwards-compatibility ensures this doesn’t happen. In the case of changing syntax (which is very unlikely), authors need to make a calculated decision beforehand as to whether the maturity of a particular feature is adequate before utilizing it.

I think a good rule of thumb is…

For your own hobby or personal site(s):
Dive into CSS3…play, learn, play, learn, play, learn…as much as you have time for.

For client sites:
Stick to what is the current standard. You’ll avoid phone calls with them telling you that they’re getting complaints from users about cross-browser incompatibility.

For IE6 Users:
Damned be the individuals and companies who haven’t yet upgraded their hardware that forces any developer to be subjected to that abomination.

IE6 is over 8 years old! Like dog years, internet years place that antiquated browser at about 56 years old. Dogs don’t live that long, so why do we let this browser live that long?

For that matter, damned be MicroSoft for so often swimming against the W3C current!

For the websites I’m currently developing that I answer to nobody for, I’m not giving IE6 or it’s users a second thought. Perhaps foolish, but I’m done with that browser.

When IE6 came out it was a breakthrough. The most standard compliant browser of that time.

They had such a market majority that Microsoft gave up developing it until Mozilla took a chunk

IE6 implimented the W3C, but not the final spec. They jumped the gun in order to get ahead.


You need to remember that Microsoft is one of the members of the W3C and actually has a significant input into what goes into those standards.

All of the major browser creators are a part of the W3C and so something isn’t going to become a W3C recommendation unless the browsers intend to implement it.

The last time a browser tried to jump in too quickly with implementing proposed draft standards before they became a recommendation there were subtle changes to the way that it was decided the standards should work at the last minute and so IE6 ended up not quite implementing the standard correctly. So James Hopkins claim that changes are unlikely is not as unlikely as he claims since that is exactly what happened when Microsoft tried to jump ahead too far with IE6.

That was I agree…